Take another quiz >
thumb

The Vikings!

Guess these facts about the Vikings and their mythology.
Give Up?
Enter answer here
0 / 20 guessed
The quiz is paused. You have remaining.
Scoring
You scored /20 = %.
This beats or equals % of test takers
The average score is
Your high score is
Your best time is remaining
Points
You have earned / 5 points for this quiz
This quiz is not eligible for points
Next Level
/
Keep scrolling down for answers and more stats ...
×
Help

Enter answers in the area marked "Enter answer here".

You can enter any answer, at any time - they don't have to be in order

Punctuation and capitalization don't matter on JetPunk.

Hint
Answer
Language of the Vikings
Old Norse
Island nation settled by Vikings in 874
This explorer was the first to settle Greenland
Erik the Red
Son of the above who settled in Canada
Leif Erikson
Name of that Canadian settlement
This group of Vikings settled France and went on to conquer England in 1066
King who ruled over Norway, Denmark, and England
Cnut the Great
Term for a Viking slave
Term for an epic Viking story
An inscribed stone with writing and/or pictures on it
Runestone
An alcoholic beverage made from fermented honey
God with one eye and a long beard
God of thunder
Shape-shifting god sometimes called a "trickster"
The Viking version of the apocalypse
Land of the gods in Viking mythology
Majestic hall in that land where those who die in battle are taken
Female beings who bring warriors to that hall
Vikings served in the elite “Varangian Guard” of this eastern Empire
Byzantine Empire
The Vikings conquered this Slavic city on the Dnieper River
Answer Stats
Hint
Answer
% Correct
Your %
(68)
These guys were scary and tough and all-conquering - I wonder why they've all faded away by now? And to where?
reply
delete
Feb 28, 2017
(75)
For lack of a better word, the Vikings were basically 'savages'. They were not well trained and organized, like an army, but just bold and brazen. In the height of their 'reign', the lands that they attacked were docile and unorganized, and therefore easy to overcome. The Vikings reign fell as the people of other lands organized, trained, and developed warfare/fighting strategies, at which point, they were able to defend themselves and effectively repel the Viking attacks. When the Vikings dominance was no longer guaranteed, and defeat the more likely outcome, the Vikings stopped their attacks.
reply
delete
Feb 28, 2017
(67)
You should visit a museum in one of the scandinavian countries, or alternatively read a book about the vikings. The notion that they were "savages" is one that contemperary historians have largely refuted. Of course, I can see why anyone would think that, seeing how they are generally portrayed in films/cartoons/... But I would suggest reading a (decent) book about them to find out more.
delete
Mar 13, 2017
Certain of their practices, such as human sacrifice, could definitely be construed as savage.
delete
Mar 13, 2017
(44)
A very common understanding of historians maintains that spreading of Christianity - a new set of values - marked the end of the Viking era. The new leadership, with the help of Rome, organized society in a new way. Some areas remained longer under the savage viking rule.
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(52)
Human sacrifice can certainly be considered savage, though there have been MANY societies throughout history in various parts of the world that employed human sacrifice as a sacred rite, and the Norse were hardly the worst practitioners of human sacrifice. Even the Greeks and Romans practiced human sacrifice to some extent!
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(44)
"Savages" is just a wee bit of an oversimplification. And this business of where are they now? They're dead of course! That was a thousand years ago. But you have a look at the spread of Anglo-Saxons all over the world... I'd say the Vikings descendants have kicked on pretty well...And are probably more barbaric then they were, what with our colonies all over the world, massacring local populations, blowing up the middle east, dropping nuclear bombs on people... "Where are they now" ~ honestly dude...
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(68)
In some cases, they mingled well with people in the lands they conquered. They were underrated traders and diplomats. In France, some years after sailing to Paris and plundering it, a Jarl among them (I think it was Rollo) was granted formal control of Normandy at the condition he converted to christianism, which he did. They never went back in Norway, one of their offsprings is known as William the Conqueror and the rest is history. So rather than fading away, I'd say they succesfully did what was in their best interest. If you go to the Channel Islands one day, you could find that there is a lot of traditions and even some laws that date back from the times where it was the possession of the Jarl of Normandy. I even think that the Queen reigns there as the Duchess of Normandy. Not every conqueror can claim to have succeeded that much about integrating and keeping for centuries the places they conquered. They are a big influence in a lot of Western Europe civilizations.
reply
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(66)
From Wikipedia:

"The Channel Islands fall into two separate self-governing bailiwicks, the Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Bailiwick of Jersey. Both are British Crown dependencies, and neither is part of the United Kingdom. They have been part of the Duchy of Normandy since the tenth century, and Queen Elizabeth II is often referred to by her traditional and conventional title of Duke of Normandy. However, pursuant to the Treaty of Paris (1259), she governs in her right as The Queen (the "Crown in right of Jersey", and the "Crown in right of the république of the Bailiwick of Guernsey"), and not as the Duke. This notwithstanding, it is a matter of local pride for monarchists to treat the situation otherwise: the Loyal Toast at formal dinners is to 'The Queen, our Duke', rather than to 'Her Majesty, The Queen' as in the UK."
delete
Jun 16, 2017
(71)
My husband, who has always thought he was mainly Irish, had the DNA testing done and was quite surprised to discover he is more Scandinavian even though his ancestors came to the US from Ireland. So I'd say quite a few of the Vikings settled in Ireland and likely other areas of their conquests.
reply
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(67)
You don't require the old Norse "mjöð" for "mead", so why not allow "Gotterdammerung" or "Twilight of the Gods" for "Ragnarok"?
reply
delete
Feb 28, 2017
(64)
Because Ragnarok is the common English term for it?
reply
delete
Feb 28, 2017
(25)
Not if you're a Wagner fan...
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(69)
You should also accept Knut/Knud.
reply
delete
Mar 1, 2017
(75)
I never saw "Cnut" before. Canute, yes and that's how I got it after "Knut" didn't work. Agree Knut/Knud should be accepted.
reply
delete
Mar 1, 2017
(40)
Agreed.
delete
Apr 21, 2017
(60)
+1
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(53)
+1
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(35)
+1
delete
Jun 14, 2017
(45)
I think (but don't take this as gospel!) that Cnut was the original spelling in England, which got "modernized" in later centuries to Canute, as happened with a lot of other names from that period (the Victorians changed many Anglo-Saxon names). Cnut has been used within academia for some time now, and that has seeped through into mainstream usage in English.
delete
Jun 21, 2017
(72)
Wow, I know a lot less about Vikings than I thought.
reply
delete
Mar 1, 2017
(68)
Got 15, which is actually a bit better than I expected. Six of those I owe to the Thor movies, so thank you Marvel ;). Thanks to Quizmaster for accepting Anse-aux-Meadows for Vinland, by the way. For the life of me I couldn't remember the viking name so I tried the French name, knowing it was correct but never expecting it to work :).
reply
delete
Mar 6, 2017
(55)
If you're accepting "Oden", then why not "Tor" and "Loke" as well?
reply
delete
Mar 14, 2017
(55)
Or "träl" or "Valhall" even?
reply
delete
Mar 14, 2017
(39)
Or Walkure or Valkyre? Aren't they plural?
reply
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(71)
So thrall must be the origin of the word, enthrall. I've learned my new fact for the day. Thank you, QM.
reply
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(60)
Were the Rurik dynasty not invited to come and rule Kiev, rather than it being an invasion? (traditionally)
reply
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(38)
Please accept Knut for "Cnut" and Tor for "Thor".
reply
delete
Jun 13, 2017
(31)
That feeling when you know the answer in Danish, but not in English.
reply
delete
Jun 18, 2017
×
Congrats!
You have reached a new level
To save this level, you'll have to
create an account
×
Congrats!
You have earned a new badge
To save this badge, you'll have to
create an account